Lions Love (... and Lies)

This film captures the spirit i was possessed by whilst a teenager, i love it achingly. Not for everyone. For one thing, don't expect a plot driven film, that's just silly to expect here, expect a decadent period piece, with eye popping visuals and hippie excess. For me it's one of the best things i'll ever see!

Agnes Varda directed this fascinating cinema verte like fictional film in 1969. The film traces Gerome Ragnai and James Rado (the composers of HAIR) and Andy Warhol actress Viva as they try to break into the Hollywood lifestyle. American feminist icon filmmaker Shirley Clarke is featured in an extended role, also playing a fictionalized version of herself. Clarke is attempting to get studio financing for a film project that seems to be consciously satirizing the struggles Varda must have had in getting this film made. This film is funny, beautifully shot and imaginatively edited. It is a must see for fans of Varda and the French New Wave.

Documentary maker Shirley Clarke comes to Hollywood... finding nothing there .... to negotiate with a big studio about making a movie in which movie stars play themselves. Instead, she hangs out with three fringe actors while her agent negotiates with studio brass. All this is against the background of the Robert Kennedy assassination and the shooting of Andy Warhol.

It's an Agnes Varda movie, which means there is a sarcastic edge to the affair. The actors, part of Andy Warhol's coterie, perform their ad lib roles in a very artificial manner; Miss Clarke refuses to do a particular scene, so Miss Varda comes from behind the camera to do it herself. Only the agent and studio executive give realistic performances. For the rest of it, it seems, it's a movie about movie people trying to make a movie. It's endlessly recursive, and the failure of the project means that's this winds up being a movie about not making a movie. In the end, there is no movie, no studio making a movie, no Hollywood (beyond Larry Edmond's book shop), no Robert Kennedy, and very nearly no Andy Warhol or Shirley Clarke. It's a movie about nothing, except the lights and colors of Hollywood. It's an elaborately detailed travelogue, stretched out two hours, with beautiful people who are so shallow they might exist only on a flat movie screen.

The movie is totally a waste of precious time unless you are a great fan of any of the actors involved or like to see news clips of the 60's in California. The best part is the first part of the movie showing a scene out of a play "the Beard" with Billie Dixon and Richard Bright, but that is just about all you are going to see of Richard Bright. There seems to be no structure, no set script. I think anybody could have done a better job with other wanna be actors and a camcorder. I cant believe they wasted so much time on a scene where they were too lazy to get out of bed to order or make coffee. At the end you will be slapping yourself in the face either to wake yourself up or to scold yourself for the fact that you watched the whole thing from beginning to end.

Agnes Varda smiled at me! The director was present at the showing of this film (with her 1982 short Ulysse shown beforehand), and she described the historical background of Lions Love (about two feet from my face!). This was her only film made in America, and it's very much influenced by the cinematic court of Andy Warhol. Lions Love stars Warhol model Viva and two men, James Rado and Gerome Ragni (the creators of the musical Hair) as a spiritually linked threesome living in L.A. Filmmaker Shirley Clarke crashes at their apartment, having come to L.A. to meet with producers. To sum the film up, it's late '60s garbage. Sorry to say it, but it is. Mostly improvised, with a lot of goofy, goofy scenes. Warhol and his cronies are almost completely forgotten, at least the cinematic section of it. I would guess that this was just one of a hundred films made in a similar style during this period. My only point of reference is the 1972 film Ciao! Manhattan, which depicts the toppling of Warhol's most famous protege, Edie Sedgwick. That film, I think, is a masterpiece, despite of or because of its cinema verite insanity. Lions Love is much less interesting, and it never reaches an emotional level like Ciao! Manhattan does. Still, Lions Love isn't worthless. It may be garbage, but it is amusing garbage. This is probably due to my youthful interest surrounding the late 1960s, and most who lived through the era would probably find the film insufferable. And it does find a structural anchor, if not an emotional one, in the assassination of Robert Kennedy, as well as the attempted murder of Andy Warhol. If the film depicts the events factually (and, from what Madame Varda seemed to imply, these things happened as they were making the film), those two events happened on the same day. 6/10.